t-dore - t-shaped doctors in residence case study case... · t-dore - t-shaped doctors in residence...

T-DoRe - T-shaped Doctors in Residence Case Study

Project acronym: T-DoRe

Project title: T-shaped Doctors in Residence – Doctoral training in RTOs and Industries

Project co-ordinating Partner:

Project co-ordinator contact details:

Start date of the project:

Duration

Responsible of the Document: Outotec

Version: V1.0

Issue Date:

T-DoRe 06.07.2017

© T-DoRe Consortium D4 T-DoRe -Case Study

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 Executive Summary ..........................................................................................................................3

2 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................4

3 Research Questions ..........................................................................................................................5

4 Methods ..............................................................................................................................................6

5 Results ................................................................................................................................................8

5.1 Innovation Champion Candidates .............................................................................................8

5.2 Implementation of the T-Dore Itinerary .....................................................................................9

5.3 Analysis of the Case Study Propositions ............................................................................... 11

5.3.1 Pursuing Knowledge in the Service of Innovation.................................................................. 11

5.3.2 Pursuing Knowledge According to Trans-disciplinary Way ................................................... 12

5.3.3 Developing a Broader Skill Set .............................................................................................. 13

6 Discussion and Conclusion .......................................................................................................... 15

7 References ...................................................................................................................................... 16

8 Annex 1: Interview questions ....................................................................................................... 17

8.1 Interview questions for the students ...................................................................................... 17

8.2 Interview questions for the mentor ......................................................................................... 17

T-DoRe 06.07.2017

© T-DoRe Consortium of 18 D4 T-DoRe -Case Study

1 Executive Summary

The purpose of the Case Study work package (WP4) was to study how the interventions during the Methodology (WP3) activity were implemented, as well as assess their impact and effectiveness in developing T-shaped innovation champions. The study focused in particular how the T-Dore program can help to 1) pursue knowledge in the service of innovation, 2) pursue knowledge according to a trans-disciplinary way, and 3) develop a broader skill set, such as teamwork skills, capacity to build networks, and effective communication skills.

The scope of this single case study was the T-Dore program, which included eleven participants involved in the program in Finland and Spain from RTOs, University, and corporation, during 2016-2017.

The results show that the T-Dore program did have a significant impact on developing participants towards innovation champions. All interviewed participants mentioned that they had lacked the business understanding and none of the participants had taken any business related courses before the T-Dore program. The main learning points all participants mentioned were that they gained confidence in front of the customer, learned to use concrete business model tools, tested their ideas in front of real customers, pivoted the idea, and iterated the value propositions continuously with the help of customers, their peer, and instructors.

Although the impact of the T-Dore program in developing trans-disciplinary knowledge was not as strong as in developing innovation capabilities, the knowledge about circular economy, digitalization, and industry 4.0 helped to increase the awareness and managed to widen the participants’ perspective.

Based on the case study, we can conclude that different needs and expectations depended on the participants’ profiles. Novice researchers expected more support in networking and thesis work, such as in time-management and practicing presentation and language skills. On the other hand, senior researchers or participants in the industry, did not feel the need for this kind of support. The senior level experts expected more support in career development and personal coaching.

Mentors felt that they would have needed more support in their role. The mentors expected guidance for supporting their mentees especially in soft-skill development and career planning. Based on this feedback, it is necessary to develop some kind of mechanism of peer support or guiding for the mentors as well. This might be an information package, at the minimum, and maybe even own workshop or online network for continuous peer support during the process.

T-DoRe 06.07.2017


2 Introduction

The Raw Materials innovation ecosystem and progress towards circular economy demands knowledge in applied sciences, practice, and market innovation. The aim of the T-Dore program was to develop T-shaped innovation champions for RTOs and industry in the raw material sector. Research and Technology Organizations (RTO) and industry need champions with holistic understanding of technological, economical, and environmental perspectives of the raw material innovation value chain. Furthermore, T-shaped champions need to have a broader skill set to connect with other fields of knowledge -and transform new knowledge into value propositions. The vertical bar on the T represents an expert with deep knowledge in a single field or discipline, whereas the horizontal bar represents the ability to collaborate across disciplines with experts in other areas to apply knowledge in areas of expertise other than one’s own.

To develop such key skills and knowledge that will create professionals capable of boosting innovations, generating new business ideas, and putting them in the market, the T-Dore itinerary had two main objectives:

1) pursuing knowledge in the service of innovation and

2) self-development.

With pursuing knowledge in the service of innovation we mean practicing to transform knowledge into innovations, learning to see opportunities, and taking ideas into action that can be transferred to the company and market. With the second objective, self-development, we mean becoming aware of your own strengths and weaknesses, possibilities of professional growth and career planning, as well as enhancing own team work and leadership skills.

The purpose of the Case Study work package (WP4) was to study how the interventions during the Methodology (WP3) activity were implemented, as well as assess their impact and effectiveness in developing T-shaped innovation champions. This study is a single case study that investigated the T-Dore program. We analyzed the program and its impact on shaping innovation champions. The individuals participating in the T-Dore program were chosen from four technical areas in the raw materials industry. This way we were able to consider also contextual conditions relating to the program, which we believe might be relevant to the phenomenon under study. The technical focus area were: 1) separation technology, 2) systemic design, 3) substitution, and 4) recycling. While the topics on separation and recycling focused more on processes, the systemic design and substitution, focused on design. At a high-level, systemic design area could be seen as an effective means to tie all the focus area together, and to offer a learning opportunity across all areas to further support development of the T-shaped innovation champions.

The case study results will be used for implementing an action based roadmap for identification, development, and nurturing of T-shaped innovation champions in the raw materials industry.

T-DoRe 06.07.2017


3 Research Questions

The case study research questions were the following:

1) How can this kind of program help to develop T-shaped innovation champions? What are the lessons learned?

2) How different stakeholders (students, mentors, supervisors, and program staff) in the program describe the impact of the activities in shaping innovation champions? Did these interventions affect the intended way?

3) How students describe their experiences after participating in the T-Dore program? Do these experiences influence students’ decision making related to pursuing the identified boundary crossing competences and future career choices?

4) How did the T-Dore program support the thesis work?

5) How the organizations (university, RTO, and industry) describe the impact of the T-Dore program in developing their own degrees and study programs for doctoral students.

The scope of this case study was the T-Dore program, which included the participants (students, mentors, supervisors, and program staff) involved in the program in Finland and Spain, during 2016-2017.

Based on the research questions and the case study scope, we defined the following potential propositions that would guide the data collection and analysis. These propositions were based on literature and the findings from the T-Dore requirements study (D2).

Case study propositions

T-Dore program helps individuals and organization pursuit knowledge in the service of innovation, such as waste reduction, recycling, higher material efficiency and residue utilization, as well as deep understanding of the raw material system and value chain.

T-Dore program helps individuals and organization to pursuit knowledge according to a trans-disciplinary way.

Interventions during the T-Dore program develop a broader skill set, such as teamwork skills, capacity to build networks, and effective communication skills.

T-DoRe 06.07.2017


4 Methods

The case study is a research strategy which focuses on understanding exemplary cases through complex interventions, relationships, communities, or programs (Baxter & Jack, 2008). The aim is to understand the dynamics present within single settings. Case studies combine data collection methods such as archives, interviews, questionnaires, and observations. The evidence can be quantitative or qualitative, or both. Case studies can be used to accomplish various aims: to provide description, test theory, or generate theory.

This case study is explanatory describing the real-life intervention and linking the program implementation with program effects.

T-Dore Itinerary

The T-Dore itinerary consisted of three 2-day workshops, where participants and instructors met face-to-face, see picture 1. We chose learning by doing teaching method for the itinerary, where participants were engaged in personal project work, as well as having various group exercises and discussion with their peers during the whole program.

Figure 1. T-Dore itinerary

During the itinerary, every participant worked on their own research project by developing a business model about a chosen research topic, in most cases about their own PhD thesis. The main idea in these workshops was always to work and discuss together after some individual work, such as reading and individual reflection, or after a presentation by the instructors, in order to foster team learning and the creation of their own understanding of the topic. During the whole itinerary, participants worked in groups of three or four people.

Data sources

The evidences were collected from the following data sources:

1) Learning contract and learning diary This data source consisted of student’s reflection about his/her own personal learning path, such as past experience, current state, and future goals. Students reflected what are their strengths and weaknesses, and where they want to go, and what to develop. During the T-Dore program, students also kept a learning diary, where they reflected their own ideas and learnings. The learning diaries were stored in a Learning Management System (Moodle) in those parts that could be shared with others.

T-DoRe 06.07.2017


2) Motorola Feedback questions were collected from each workshop and customer visits. Students reflected on following question: What went well?, What went poorly?, What did we learn?, What will we do better next time?, How did this project help me in my development? These feedback answers were used as data sources.

3) Value Proposition and Business Model canvases During the workshops, students created two canvases: value proposition and business model. These canvases were used for data sources for the case study. This data source will give answers to questions about innovation capacity, ideation, customer understanding, and prototyping.

4) Interviews In the end of the program, students and mentors were interviewed. This data source will give answers to the research questions about T-Dore programs impact on developing innovation, as well as transdisciplinary and broader skill sets of doctors.

Reporting the findings from the case study were done by addressing each proposition and answering the research questions. This way the report stayed in focus and avoided being distracted by the mounds of interesting data that was collected during the project.

Achieving trustworthiness we made sure the following study design strategies were applied appropriately. Case study research questions were clearly written and reflected the defined propositions. We did not use any sampling strategies, since this single case study used all available data sources from each participant for analysis. The data was collected in the Mudle (Mondragon Moodle) learning platform. Participants submitted the learning contracts, parts of learning diaries, and final business models into the platform. Each material was named after the participant.

The Motorola feedback material was photographed and saved in Mudle after each workshop. Project participants in each organization conducted the participant and mentor interviews face-to-face. The summaries of the interviews were translated in English and analyzed by the author. The author observed and took notes during the whole T-Dore itinerary, in each three workshops and online feedback session, in order to be able to analyze the data sources and understand the phenomena correctly.

Participants

Eleven participants started the program. Four participants worked in Research & Technology Organizations (RTO), five represented the University, and two participants worked in a corporation. Seven people were from Finland, and four from Spain. Five participants were male, and five female.

The requirement for applying to the T-Dore program was that the participant is near completing the thesis, or there is maximum of three years since dissertation. Two participants out of eleven had already completed their PhD thesis. One was working as a post-doctoral researcher in RTO, and the other participant worked in a company as a R&D research engineer. Their project work during T-Dore program was related to an ongoing research or product development project in their organization. The rest of the participants were in various stages of their PhD thesis, varying from early to finalization stage. From the PhD students, three worked part time on their thesis, and the rest of the group were full time graduate students.

In overall, participants were very committed to the program. Only one person missed two workshops out of three, and another participants missed one workshop. The rest of the group attended all three workshops. Ten participants out of eleven completed the program and submitted all required assignments. From one participant, we did not get the final business model submission. All participants were interviewed for this case study.

In the beginning of the program, the participants needed to designate a mentor for getting support during the program. However, two participants stated in the interview that they had not had a mentor or that the support from the mentor had been minimal. We interviewed six mentors in order to collect their experience and feedback about the program.

T-DoRe 06.07.2017


5 Results

In this section, we will report the case study by providing a chronological report and by addressing each proposition. We first describe the context in a concise manner by introducing the participants, their research topics, as well as a detailed description of the implementation of the T-Dore itinerary. Secondly, we report the phenomenon under study, which is how this kind of program can help develop T-shaped innovation champions. This is done by addressing each stated proposition and answering the research questions.

5.1 Innovation Champion Candidates

In the beginning of the program, the participants were asked to write a learning contract, where they reflected back on their learning history, career goals, and ambitions for professional growth. In the learning contract, the participants were committing to a personal learning plan. These reflections were crafted into an action plan with goals and means to reach them. Ten participants out of eleven submitted the learning contract.

Based on the analysis of the learning contracts, majority of the participants had very technical and research oriented career goals. The main driver for most of the participants were to develop one-self to become an internationally recognized expert. They were highly motivated by personal development within their own technical discipline. Acquiring deep knowledge and being able to apply this knowledge in practice, for example in larger research projects, developing solutions for customers, or providing consultation in the field. Only one person stated that the ambition was to develop business understanding and leadership skills in order to progress in a corporate management related role, such as leadership and product development. For that particular participants, the PhD was seen as an enabler for promotion and credibility, not so much as an instrument for research career.

When asked about what kind of competences you would need to develop in the future to reach your career goals, the majority of the participants listed skills such as networking skills, project management, as well as presentation and language skills. A few participants that had been working in corporation or RTO organization, mentioned also business thinking skills and knowledge about how to sell your ideas, to be important for personal development. None of the participants had any prior experience about entrepreneurship, nor did they state that this would be something they would need to develop in the future. Two persons out of eleven, stated that they were uncertain about their career choices at the moment. They were not yet convinced that a researcher would be their career choice.

The research or project topics of the participants were mainly in separation, recycling, substitution, and secondary material processing and utilization focus areas. One project handled product-service system concepts in machine tool sector and could be categorized in systemic design focus area. Many projects focused in separation techniques for tailings management, such as beneficiation or recovery and utilization of tailings for ceramics with special functionality. Several projects handled leaching technologies and simulation, recycling of material, electrochemical water treatment, and sorting technology development for mining industry. Two thesis concentrated in new material development, for example in field of light materials and thermoplastic elastomers.

The technological readiness level of the candidate research topics varied. Some project cases were starting from very early state ideas to be proposed towards potential companies, some were already developed on high technological readiness level and highly developed concepts e.g. inside the company product development process. These both ends of innovation process from idea concept to near launching stages were involved and processed through TDoRe methodology. In many projects, the value propositions were created beside the special functionality and performance with environmental related topics, such as energy saving or circular economy topics, such as secondary materials and recycling or light weighting. Especially these aspects reflected in business models, in new service concepts (sharing, product as a service), and in new design strategies and manufacturing methods.

T-DoRe 06.07.2017


5.2 Implementation of the T-Dore Itinerary

The aim of the T-Dore itinerary was to develop T-shaped innovation champions with holistic understanding of technological, economical, and environmental perspectives of the raw material innovation value chain. Furthermore, T-shaped champions needed to develop a broader skill set, such as teamwork skills, capacity to build networks, and effective communication skills. All these themes were addressed and practiced during the itinerary.

During the first workshop (see picture 2), the focus was on creating a safe learning environment among the participants, who did not know each other. There was a welcoming dynamic in order to understand better the participants' background, competences and skills. We also presented the learning itinerary and the learning platform that participants were using to interact. We introduced several concepts related to leadership, teamwork, lean start-up and customers. All these concepts were worked in groups and in a practical way.

Picture 2. Participant’s presentation during the first workshop.

The first workshop was devoted to reach a good understanding of how to create value from the knowledge the researchers are generating in their thesis. Participants used the value proposition and the business model canvas developed by Osterwalder and Pigneur (2010). Participants had the opportunity to start thinking about their value proposition and their potential customers. For most of the participants, this was the first time they were thinking about the customers and their real needs and problems. Usually research is not driven by a specific user needs. In addition, we had a lecture on leadership and participants were given a homework assignment for taking a Belbin self-assessment (www.belbin.com) test that help them to identify their behaviour and role participating in a team.

As a summary of the first workshop, the contents were of interest for the participants, and introduced new perspectives in their research work. The idea of going beyond their research to think in potential customers was well received. In many times, researchers tend to think about users in an abstract way: they do not have a name or a face, nor the problems are known or validated. Therefore in this process they would have to visit companies, validate hypothesis, test early prototypes, collect feedback, and perform actions that will help them to take decisions in their thesis, based not only in the technological progress but also in the market reality.

Another strong point highlighted by the participants was the good learning atmosphere created. The opportunity of interacting with researchers from different countries, experience, and background was considered very relevant and positive, so they started this process with high motivation.

The second workshop concentrated in team work and innovation. Between the face-to-face sessions, participants had met in one online session to talk about how they were progressing with their lean canvas exercise and whether they had had any problems or questions. Despite of the low interaction between the workshops, the atmosphere in the second was very friendly and enthusiastic. We started the workshop by talking about the challenges and learning needs, as a way to reconnect them with their interest in the topics of the workshop and for us to understand better where they were in the project work.

Then we started talking about dialog and team work. And the question to work on was “What teamwork experience do you remember that made impact in the team performance? The participants shared in groups their experiences on team work creating a list of ingredients that make team work. We played Group Work

T-DoRe 06.07.2017


cards (https://groupworksdeck.org) together while learning to work better in groups. This helped us to discuss about different aspects on how we relate with others, how we interpret personal skills, etc.

One of the homework was to fill in the Belbin self- and observers-assessments. Belbin method was explained in order to interpret the results. We discussed about the results in groups and guided participants in the interpretation.

One of the key elements in the second workshop was to refine their lean canvas and value proposition. In groups participants discussed their findings and got valuable inputs from their peers and instructors. The main objective was to formulate the research topic to a business “idea” for the potential customers, as well as list other stakeholders related with the research topic. The participants were also asked to consider what information is still missing about the potential customers and prepare for a customer interview.

As the project will be communicated in different contexts, it’s important to start with a short and concise project mantra. Participants had to prepare a pitch and present it in 3 minutes to others. It was a very exciting moment for them and a way to test themselves. To finish the workshop a Motorola (see appendix 2) refection was done.

The second workshop covered all the topics defined. During discussions and reflection, participants realized that they had very similar challenges and needs, and instructors felt that those challenges could be addressed and answered during the workshops.

One observation was that there were perhaps a bit too many topics for the short time. Much effort was needed to absorb team work, roles, innovation management, industry 4.0, work in value propositions, prepare and do a pitching, etc. all in one and a half days.

All in all, we had been able to create moments where dialogue was flowing and creating interest in participants that connect and engage perfectly with the subjects. This dialogue is a great source of learning. Especially when we talked about roles and patterns in a team, conversation was very lively and interesting. One special moment was the pitching exercises. This created in all participants a moment of “out of the comfort zone” that made the sessions as they said very interesting and valuable. In the feedback, participants even said that they want to do the pitching again.

Again, between the workshops, participants had a previous online group session with instructors to talk about their progress with their lean canvas, customer visits, and problems or questions that might have arisen. Instructors held two group sessions and one individual session with each participant. These sessions helped the participants to arrive well prepared for the workshop, receiving feedback and advice from the instructors.

The third workshop started with a brief reconnecting session where participants were distributed in groups of three persons and they shared among themselves their progress. Next, new Circular Business Model topic was introduced. After the lecture, the participants worked in teams to improve the business model of their project, based on circular approaches using the McKinsey RESOLVE (www.mckinsey.com) framework and the CBMC (Circular Business Model Canvas). Finally in a plenary session, they shared the main findings and difficulties to increase circularity. The rest of the day, participants continued working in their projects by using the Validation Board tool. They had time for individual work and later on sharing in groups, with the objective of reaching a Business Template final version, and uploading it to the Mudle platform. They also received feedback about their business model reports.

The second day started with a lecture about Marketing & Branding. We introduced the concept of Brand as element to differentiate from others, and the Brand Envelope tool. We also talked about customers, the ways to identify them, and the channels to reach them. There was an interesting dialogue about it, for example the differences of branding and marketing in business to business and in business to customers.

After the Brand session participants had enough time to prepare their pitch before the experts arrived. They also prepared materials to show the project during the Open Session, like posters or videos. External experts came to listen to the pitches, some of them from technology units of Tecnalia, but also others from University and from a plastic company. In this new improved version of their pitch, we instructed to use the Brand Code of their project to provoke emotions in the audience. The result of the pitches were very good in general, and we could really notice the improvement in these new pitches compared with the pitches done the last time. Next we held an Open Session where PhD candidates had the opportunity to present more details of their projects in private or group open discussions with experts.

Final topic of the day was to receive feedback from the instructors on their Business Models. After the feedback, participants wrote their Personal Action Plan for the following weeks. To finish the workshop we

T-DoRe 06.07.2017


did a final Motorola exercise, covering the whole itinerary. This was the final refection and feedback by the participants about the learning process.

5.3 Analysis of the Case Study Propositions

5.3.1 PURSUING KNOWLEDGE IN THE SERVICE OF INNOVATION

Our first proposition was that the T-Dore program can help individuals and organizations pursuit knowledge in the service of innovation, such as waste reduction, recycling, higher material efficiency and residue utilization, as well as deep understanding of the raw material system and value chain.

The innovation is defined as a process of translating an idea into a product or service that creates value to the customer. In other words, also the monetary aspect of the idea or invention needs to be considered. During T-Dore program, the participants practiced to formulate the research idea into value proposition, tested the proposition with real customers, re-formulated the proposition, and developed the business model around the idea. The process was iterative and during the process, participants got feedback from their peers, mentors, instructors, and end customers. Learning by doing teaching method was effective way to make participants learn and change their thinking.

The interviews, as well as the business model reports show that the T-Dore program did have a significant impact on developing participants towards innovation champions. All interviewed participants mentioned that they had lacked the business understanding and none of the participants had taken any business related courses before the T-Dore program. The main learning points all participants mentioned were that they gained confidence in front of the customer, learned to use concrete business model tools, tested their ideas in front of real customers, pivoted the idea, and iterated the value propositions continuously with the help of customers, their peer, and instructors.

“In my opinion the most important thing that we have learned was how to translate a research project to business. In fact, my best background from the program is how my way of thinking on business has been changed.” (Participant I, University)

Many participants stated that the pitching exercises gave confidence to present your ideas in front of an audience. The pitching exercise forced participants to simplify the message and gave confidence in confronting customers. One interviewee mentioned than now she is able to talk the same language with the customer and other stakeholders, not just the “researcher” talk.

“But I have changed my mentality and now I know the importance of having also a business perspective of a project and how to sell it in short time.” (Participant E, University)

Several participants mentioned that they had already been able to apply the learnings in practice. One interviewee stated that she had direct benefit of the business model canvas tool in her work at the company. She used the tools when writing a feasibility study for a customer.

“I had to work on this feasibility study, and I realized that I could directly use the business model canvas tool to work on the feasibility report. I had of course heard this business terminology before in our company, but now finally I got deeper understanding about the reasoning behind them, as well as I got good tools to build business models in the future.” (Participant D, Industry)

Another interviewee stated that he had helped his friend when starting up a business by applying the canvas tool in developing a business model together for his friend. One participant mentioned that she had started to apply the methods already after each workshop.

T-DoRe 06.07.2017


“Yes, I have applied the learned things, e.g. in tasks between the workshops. I made also some progress concerning my research work, and I understood better the customers view, also. Nowadays, I ask more from customers already in the developing stage.” (Participant E, University)

Furthermore, one mentor mentioned that after the workshops, he could see the change in his students’ behavior and way they were considering also customer point of views in their discussions.

“After each workshop, I could see a clear development step in my students. They were more confident in presenting and I could see the old thinking patterns had changed. Of course during the workshops there we a lot of information transferred, so it need obviously more adjusting”. (Mentor A, University)

In the beginning of the T-Dore program, all participants felt uncomfortable and anxious about contacting the customers. They felt shy to present their ideas and research themes to real customers and nervous about the possible feedback they would get. But stepping out of the laboratory and meeting the customers was a major eye opener for all participants. They gained understanding of the customer’s point of views, they validated their business cases, and came to realize that the research has to address real customer needs. They learned that customers can give input on where to focus the research, what they value, and what are their needs and pain points.

“Research and this field is new for me, so I feel that I have not much to say to the customer, because I don’t have any proof whether my idea is working or not. My first difficulty was how to approach the customer and find out about their needs. How to explain my ideas to the customer.” (Participant J, University)

“If we want some business, we have to face the real world and not only the academic area. My supervisor is quite open to work with companies and organizations, which I think is quite important.” (Participant E, University)

During T-Dore itinerary, also circular economy and industry 4.0 topics were introduced. The participants’ research topics all were related to raw material sector, majority addressing sorting, separation, recycling, and substitution. Therefore the circular economy topics were not all uncommon the participants. In the interviews, several participants mentioned the importance of these topics to their personal learning.

“It is also important to know how the world is changing and consequently the industry (Industry 4.0), and how business can manage with this new world (circular economy).” (Participant G, University)

5.3.2 PURSUING KNOWLEDGE ACCORDING TO TRANS-DISCIPLINARY WAY

The second proposition that we stated in the case study was that the T-Dore program would help individuals and organization to pursuit knowledge according to trans-disciplinary way. In this we mean that the participants would become aware of the need of multiple disciplines to work jointly in research in the future to create innovations. During the itinerary, this proposition was addressed by exposing participants to considering various stakeholders involved in business model development. We also tried to mix the groups so that there would be members from universities, RTOs and industry together, when discussing the various themes during the program. However, since all participants had purely technical background, the group tended to be fairly homogeneous. By mixing multiple disciplines would have enhanced the trans-disciplinary way of working and thinking. This in other had would have required more time spent for team building and learning to speak the common language.

One participant was struggling with the value proposition needing to address economical, sustainable, and legislative viewpoints. With purely technical background, it is difficult to consider all aspect affecting customers’ needs and decision-making.

T-DoRe 06.07.2017


“Visiting customers really forces you to revisit your business model. Environmentally sustainable is not enough. Legislation will be pushing, but so far the sustainability is not enough appealing to the customer. New innovation is also hard to justify, since you do not have references. Sales and marketing are neglected in the business model canvas. Sales and marketing may cost a lot.” (Participant J, University)

The second point to bring up is that during the T-Dore itinerary, all students worked on their own research projects. In order to encourage the trans-disciplinary way of working, the itinerary could have assigned a general topic for groups to work on jointly to ideate and create a new business models. This would have required to increase the overall duration of the itinerary as well as time for group working. Although the impact of the T-Dore program in developing trans-disciplinary knowledge was not as strong as in developing innovation capabilities, the knowledge about circular economy, digitalization, and industry 4.0 helped to increase the awareness and managed to widen the participants’ perspective, as one interviewee stated:

“The program has widened my view to business side. I can think my research work with wider perspective...it has been really good way for me to learn business and leadership approach. Furthermore, it has given good perspective of skills, how I should develop my skills and what kind of skills colleagues in different work need and have.” (Participant G, University).

5.3.3 DEVELOPING A BROADER SKILL SET

The third proposition we stated was that interventions during the T-Dore program would develop a broader skill set, such as teamwork skills, capacity to build networks, and effective communication skills. In order to develop these skills, the T-Dore program used the Belbin role assessment to help participants to become aware of their roles and ways of working and interacting in teams. All participants mentioned that this Belbin assessment was very useful and helped them to self-assess own skills and preferences. Furthermore, lectures and exercises about leadership were found extremely useful and relevant for all participants. None of the participants had mentioned leadership skill development prior to the program, however, in the final interviews, majority of the participants mentioned that they realized that the leadership skills were essential for researchers as well.

Other key topic that all interviewees mentioned, was to enhance their communication and networking skills. All participants gained confidence presenting their ideas in front of the audience during the pitching exercises. They mentioned that they had been very nervous about the pitching, but realized that the exercise forced them to simplify the message and to concentrate really in the key message towards customers and stakeholders. Also mentors mentioned that they could see in practice how students’ confidence in communicating and presenting in front of the audience grew while the program proceeded.

The novice researcher that were in their early stage of the PhD work stated that they would have needed more support in building networks and interacting with researchers across organizations. We all know that PhD work is very lonely and you have to have good time-management skills. The interview results show that the novice researchers were expecting more support in networking and getting support in the thesis work, such as in time-management and enhancing presentation and language skills. However, for senior researchers or participants in the industry did not feel the need for this kind of support.

A topic that was mentioned by several interviewees was that the emphasis and support for self-development was lacking. Although the participants were asked to write a learning contract where they needed to reflect their past learning history and career goals, and keep a learning diary about their progress, more mentoring and coaching was expected. Interesting was that a few senior researchers mentioned that they would have needed more support in career development and personal coaching.

“Project concentrated a lot a business case development; however the self-development tools would be needed more. The need would be personal mentoring. Teamwork skills are good to recognize, however the resources typically are not freely selectable in the current work. Network building is important. For program development: how to learn and improve self-development [to achieve the personal goals].” (Participant H, RTO)

T-DoRe 06.07.2017


Participants working in RTOs and industry showed to struggle with career goals and plans. It seems that considering own career goals and setting plans for reaching those was difficult for many. Experts in research organization seem to follow the common path and do not have any systematic or conscious plan for their career. Thinking about your own career goals, and how they could be reached and measured, was mentioned to have been very difficult. One participant mentioned that she would like to have personal coaching for this.

Based on the mentor interviews, mentors felt that they could help the students in steering the research in correct direction, finding out stakeholders and contacting the customers. However, the mentors would have needed more support in understanding the overall objectives of the program, more knowledge about business models, as well as support in the coaching and mentoring role. One mentor mentioned that she was very comfortable with providing support in technical details and building of the business case, but the more personal self-development topic was more difficult to mentor. She would have liked to have tools and support for that, or even have someone else do that part of the mentoring.

T-DoRe 06.07.2017


6 Discussion and Conclusion

Did T-Dore program influence participants’ decision making related to pursuing the identified boundary crossing competences and future career choices? The majority of the participants had a very strong technical expert profile. The strong driver for the career development for this profile was to be an internationally recognized expert in their own technical discipline. However, the T-Dore program managed to open their eyes for innovation, trans-disciplinary work practices, as well as becoming aware of the broader skill set they needed to develop within themselves. None of the participants denied the importance of these skills, and all of them with one voice stated that they would definitely recommend this program to others as well. These are the essential skills all researchers and innovation campions need in today and in the future when we progress towards circular economy.

Based on the shared views by academia, research and industry in The Requirements for Development of T-shaped Innovation Champions (D2), the two most relevant innovation champion skills listed were innovation capacity and effective collaboration and team work. Based to the case study results, we can easily say that the program accomplished these targets. The T-Dore program managed to significantly enhance participants’ innovation capabilities, not only in knowing and understanding level, but also in application. The mentors and supervisors could see the direct impact to practice in daily work. The learning by doing approach had been an effective method for researchers as adult learners, to test and apply the learnings in practice. Although there were many topics and themes to cover in this short period of time, the profound baseline for innovation capacity was constructed. How the individual participants will continue to develop the needed skills is highly dependent of the support and guidance they get from their organization and colleagues in the future. One major success factor is whether students’ PhD supervisors understand the importance of developing also innovation capacity, business understanding, and soft skills by allowing and encouraging students to take this type of courses as part of their graduate studies.

In conclusion, the case study results show that the T-Dore program did have a significant impact on developing participants towards innovation champions. The T-Dore participants developed critical competences in business understanding, customer orientation, soft skills, and social skills. Furthermore, we can conclude that different needs and expectations depended on the participants’ profiles. Novice researchers expected more support in networking and thesis work, such as in time-management and practicing presentation and language skills. On the other hand, senior researchers or participants in the industry, did not feel the need for this kind of support. The senior level experts expected more support in career development and personal coaching.

Mentors felt that they would have needed more support in their role. The mentors expected guidance for supporting their mentees especially in soft-skill development and career planning. Based on this feedback, it is necessary to develop some kind of mechanism of peer support or guiding for the mentors as well. This might be an information package, at the minimum, and maybe even own workshop or online network for continuous peer support during the process.

T-DoRe 06.07.2017


7 References

Baxter, P., Jack, S. (2008). Qualitative Case Study methodology: Study Design and Implementation for Novice Researchers. The Qualitative Report 13(4), 544-559.

Osterwalder, A and Pigneur, Y. (2010). Business Model Generation: A Handbook for Visionaries, Game Changers, and Challengers. New Jersey, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

T-DoRe 06.07.2017


8 Annex 1: Interview questions

8.1 Interview questions for the students

The program

1) Why did you apply for the T-Dore program? What were your expectations?

2) What have you learned during this program (ask concrete examples, remind of different topics

and modules, have the program agenda available)? Were your expectations met?

3) How have you applied what you have learned in practice? How will you apply in practice what

you have learned in the future? (knowledge, business thinking, ideas, tools)

4) How has the program impacted your research or thesis work?

5) How has the program impacted your future career plans?

The support

6) What skills do you feel you need to develop in yourself in the future?

7) What kind of support did you get from your mentor/supervisor/professor during this program?

8) What kind of support will you need in order to achieve the career goals you have described?

General

9) Other comments, suggestions to help doctors to develop broader skill set, such as teamwork

skills, capacity to build networks, and effective communication skills. How would you develop this

program further?

10) Would you recommend this T-Dore program to others? And why?

8.2 Interview questions for the mentor

Your role

1) What were your expectations towards this T-Dore program?

2) What did you learn about developing T-shaped doctors during this program?

3) What kind of support did you give to your mentee?

4) How often did you meet?

5) Was your role and expectations clear to you?

Your mentee

6) What did your mentee learn?

T-DoRe 06.07.2017


7) How did your mentee’s development towards T-shaped doctor proceed? How did the broader

skill set develop, such as teamwork skills, capacity to build networks, business model under-

standing?

8) How would you describe the impact of the activities in shaping innovation champions?

The support

9) What kind of support would you have needed in order to support your mentee better?

General

10) How can this kind of program help to develop T-shaped innovation champions?

11) Other comments, suggestions to help doctors to develop broader skill set, such as teamwork

skills, capacity to build networks, and effective communication skills. How would you develop this

program further?

12) Would you recommend this T-Dore program to others? And why?

t-dore - t-shaped doctors in residence case study case... · t-dore - t-shaped doctors in residence...

Documents